142nd APHA Annual Meeting and Exposition

Annual Meeting Recordings are now available for purchase

298859
A qualitative evaluation of the Menu-Choice Physical Activity Program for adults with intellectual disabilities

142nd APHA Annual Meeting and Exposition (November 15 - November 19, 2014): http://www.apha.org/events-and-meetings/annual
Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Alicia Dixon-Ibarra, MPH, PhD , School of Biological and Population Health Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
Haley Van Volkenburg, BS , College of Public Health and Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis
Mara Nery, M.S. , Department of Public Health & Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
Simon Driver, PhD , Baylor Institute of Rehabilitation, Dallas, TX
Background: The group home(GH) setting has unique barriers and facilitators to physical activity(PA) for those with intellectual disabilities(ID). The Menu-Choice Physical Activity Programwas designed through community-based participatory approaches to assist staff in including PA into GH schedules. The purpose of this study was to complete a qualitative program evaluation to receive feedback for program refinement.

Methods: Twelve participants who completed the Menu-Choice 10 week pilot intervention participated in a one-on-one interview (n=7 staff mean age 42; n=5 residents mean age 52). Participants represented five GH sites involved. Three coders reviewed transcribed documents to identify themes.          

Results: Hierarchical themes included: (1) Program training, (2) Program Implementation, (3) Program Physical Activity (4), Program Barriers (5), Program Facilitators and (6) Program Feedback.  Staff used basic program materials without further exploration. Program barriers included residents’ motivation, residents’ limitations, lack of time, and limited staff, while facilitators included staff pursuing PA with residents, staffs’ familiarity of residents, one-on-one implementation, and making PA fun. Residents enjoyed making choices, spending time with staff, and owning program materials. Program implementation was lower for sites that had fewer staff contributing to the program, residents who were more dependent, supervisors who lacked program support, and those who did not include PA into the residents’ schedule. Specific program feedback included involving residents in training, more group activities, and changing the name to avoid confusion with food. 

Conclusion: Results highlight the importance of reducing staff burden to enhance implementation and obtaining increased agency support to include the program in GH policy.

Learning Areas:

Implementation of health education strategies, interventions and programs

Learning Objectives:
Describe qualitative outcomes from implementing a physical activity program designed for adults with intellectual disabilities. Explain barriers and facilitators to implementing a physical activity program within the group home environment. Discuss next steps in refining and implementing the created physical activity health promotion program.

Keyword(s): Disabilities, Health Promotion and Education

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I am qualified to delivery this content, because I completed my PhD in the Movement Studies in Disability Program and received an MPH fall 2013. I have been mentored by Dr. Simon Driver who have extensive experience in developing health promotion programs for adults with disabilities. I have personally been involved with multiple health promotion projects for adults with intellectual disabilities.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.